Badin Spirit Olympics
Adventure Summit
SWBL wrestling championships
Home > Blogs > Sir Critic on Cinema > Archives > 2009 > June
June 2009
Another deluxe edition of What Are You Watching
For the second week running, movies come out on a Wednesday, so I hereby re-present this Deluxe What Are You Watching, covering today’s DVDs, tomorrow’s openings, and movies I’ve watched but not reviewed here.
DVDs
12 Rounds: You know, it’s funny. There WAS a time once when I thought Renny Harlin directing a movie was a good thing. Kind of a long fall from Die Hard 2 to a John Cena movie, isn’t it?
Do the Right Thing: One of the best films of the 1980s, Spike Lee’s chronicle of a particularly hot day in New York comes out in a new deluxe edition for its 20th (!) anniversary, although many of the extras are ported over from a Criterion laserdisc. (Remember those?)
The Jonas Brothers: The 3D Concert Experience: Featuring 1D music!
Street Fighter: The Legend of Chun Li: Yawn. At least 12 Rounds looks like it might be entertainingly bad.
Two Lovers: This James Gray-directed drama got some good reviews, but for better or worse, will probably be best remembered now as Joaquin Phoenix’s “last” film.
In theaters
Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs: I thought the first Ice Age was decent, but though the second one was actually rather bad. The reviews so far haven’t convinced me this third movie is a must-see. I’m still waiting for a film focusing solely on Scrat, the best part of any of these movies.
Public Enemies: Michael Mann’s take on the legendary gangster John Dillinger starring Johnny Depp and Christian Bale has been getting some lukewarm reviews. I think that temperature is too low. Review posts Wednesday.
Whatever Works: Neon opens up Woody Allen’s latest movie, with Larry David acting as the Woody figure. Evan Rachel Wood and Patricia Clarkson co-star. I don’t care if the reviews have been middling, I’m always in for whatever Allen makes.
Also, Easy Virtue transfers from the Neon to Little Art this weekend.
What I’ve Been Watching
Away We Go: John Krasinski and Maya Rudolph play an expecting couple who travel around the country to find the right home, only to realize everyone else is crazier than they are. The movie gets a little too self-consciously kooky at times, but the strong performances of the two leads keeps the movie grounded. Directed by Sam Mendes, the film makes a fascinating companion piece to his much bleaker (and underrated and misunderstood) relationship movie, Revolutionary Road. GRADE: B+
The Champ: Classic Hollywood weepie featuring an Oscar-winning performance from Wallace Beery as a washed-up fighter trying to make a comeback for his young son, played by an equally excellent Jackie Cooper. It’s sentimental and obvious, but it does a number on the tear ducts. GRADE: A
A Child is Waiting: Like many Stanley Kramer-produced message movies, this one about caring for developmentally delayed children comes across as heavy-handed and preachy at times. And I really wish the character played by Judy Garland wasn’t written to be such a mouse. To its great credit, however, the movie goes to great lengths to put a human face on the children, something that was very badly needed in 1963 - and still is now, truth be told. GRADE: B+
A Place in the Sun: This George Stevens melodrama about a sullen young man (Montgomery Clift) who contemplates killing Shelly Winters so he can be with Elizabeth Taylor is regarded as one of the all-time classics by many - but not by me. The ending in particular is heavy-handed and tries too hard to underline The Message We Must All Understand. It’s like George Stevens was an early Oliver Stone. Regardless, the movie still packs a punch when Stevens keeps a lid on the moralizing, allowing the outstanding performances to shine. Taylor never looked better than she did here. GRADE: B+
What have you seen lately?
Permalink | Comments (4) | Post your comment |
It’s almost time for the summer classic film series
This weekend brings us the Fourth of July, but my favorite attraction won’t be the fireworks.
No, it will be the Victoria Theatre’s Ultra Cool Films series, which brings classic movies to downtown Dayton every year between July and August. I see well over 100 movies a year in the theater, but without a doubt, Victoria is where I have the most fun. There’s simply nothing like seeing a classic on the big screen with a big crowd.
And as I have mentioned before in this space, the Victoria holds a special place in my heart, because that’s the first movie theater I can clearly remember going to, back when it was called the Victory and it played a little movie called Yellow Submarine, kick-starting my self-defining interests in both the Beatles and movies.
The films play at 7:30 p.m. Fridays and Saturdays and 3 p.m. Sundays. Passbooks containing 10 tickets are $24, and individual tickets are $4.75. Here are the offerings for this year, and my takes on the choices.
The Seven Year Itch, July 3-5: It’s not one of Billy Wilder’s greatest movies; the director himself thought it was something of a botch, since he didn’t get the lead he really wanted: a then-unknown actor named Walter Matthau. It’s rather dated, but there’s this girl named Marilyn in it, and there’s this one scene where she’s standing over a subway grate - and that alone is worth the price of admission.
White Christmas, July 10-12: OK, I get it, Christmas in July. That’s cute. But this is the one film in the roster that disappoints me a little. I know I’m in the minority, but I’ve always thought this film was overrated in the popular imagination. I would much rather have Victoria book the first version of the same story, the infinitely superior Holiday Inn. That’s where the song “White Christmas” really came from, and let’s face it. Danny Kaye was a lot of fun, but he simply wasn’t Fred Astaire.
The Sting, July 17-19: This makes for a nice tribute to the late, great Paul Newman. I saw this for the first time recently, and while it’s not as good as Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, it’s still quite fun.
The following weekend has a different Jimmy Stewart film playing each day.
Vertigo - July 24: I already saw this film in a theater once this year when a megaplex in Columbus played it. Think that’s going to stop me from going again? Heck, no. It’s only my favorite film of all time.
The Philadelphia Story - July 25: Cary Grant, Katharine Hepburn and Jimmy Stewart. Has there ever been a better trio of leads than that? No, there hasn’t.
Harvey - July 26: “Well, I’ve wrestled with reality for 35 years, Doctor, and I’m happy to state I finally won out over it.” Awesome. Just goes to show crazy people don’t know they’re crazy.
More after the jump …
An American in Paris, July 31 - August 2: It’s not my favorite MGM musical by a long shot, but that score is hard to beat, and the prints for MGM musicals almost always look gorgeous. If you haven’t seen it in a theater, do. And even if you have, go again anyway.
To Kill a Mockingbird, August 7-9: Tribute time again, this time for director Robert Mulligan, who died late last year. But for very good reason, this film is best remembered for Gregory Peck’s towering performance. Stand up, indeed.
Funny Girl, August 14-16: I’ve never quite understood the fascination with Barbra Streisand, but even this non-fan can see what a great vehicle this was for her talents.
American Graffiti, August 21-23: Yes, George Lucas is responsible for something good besides Star Wars. And he gets bonus points for having the most perfect use of an end credits song ever, with the Beach Boys’ “All Summer Long.”
The Phantom of the Opera Weekend: 1925 Silent Version with Lon Chaney - August 28, 1943 Claude Rains Version - August 29, 2004 Version of the Broadway Musical - August 30: The 1925 version still packs a punch, and it will play with live organ accompaniment, which is a moviegoing experience like no other. I can’t speak to the Claude Rains version, and I thought the 2004 version was a flat-out botch, save for Emmy Rossum’s Christine. Still, it’s a great idea for a themed weekend.
So, as usual, Victoria offers a very solid summer movie lineup. What do you think of it? What films will you be going to see?
Permalink | Comments (3) | Post your comment | Categories: In Area Theaters
Michael Jackson - a sad but reluctant tribute
I shouldn’t be writing any tribute to Michael Jackson. I admit it.
For one thing, this is a movie blog, and Jackson didn’t make much of an impact on the movies. The best thing that can be said about his minimal contributions to cinema was that he was far and away the highlight of The Wiz, delightfully playing the Scarecrow in that bloated movie adaptation.
And for another thing, to be honest, I couldn’t properly call myself a fan. Oh sure, I liked him a lot in the Off the Wall/Thriller days, but I must be one of 12 people who have never owned a copy of Thriller. I liked most of the songs, but almost every track on that record was released as a single. Why buy the album when most of it was on the radio 24/7 in 1983?
Do you know how many Michael Jackson songs I have in my CD collection? Two - “Say Say Say” and “The Man,” the songs he wrote with Paul McCartney on McCartney’s album, Pipes of Peace. And as a Beatlemaniac, I always deeply resented Jackson for undercutting McCartney and snatching away the rights to the Beatles’ songs. It was at that point I started to lose interest.
And that King of Pop label? Paul McCartney fits that description better than Michael Jackson ever did. Michael Jackson stopped being the King of Pop the day he started calling himself that.
I believed those molestation accusations were true. Consequently, with the sole exception of “Billie Jean,” I couldn’t listen to anything from Thriller onward without cringing.
I hate to sound unkind so soon after his death, but I had to get those feelings out and burst a few of the bubbles that were already oversized. However, I would be lying if I said I didn’t feel a great sense of sadness at what we’ve lost.
I would never deny that Michael Jackson was a phenomenal talent. Anyone who says otherwise is a fool. I will forever remember that night in 1983 when he performed “Billie Jean” during the Motown 25: Yesterday, Today and Forever TV show.
Even though he was performing to a backing track, Jackson was absolutely rocking the room with that song. Then he did that … that THING with his feet that we later learned was called the Moonwalk. That moment took millions of breaths away - including mine.
Even amid all the controversies and all the mechanical music that marked his later years, there was still a part of me that wanted him to succeed. When news of his comeback concerts broke, the cynic in me scoffed. But that 12-year-old who was absolutely blown away by that “Billie Jean” performance was curious. Could he wow us again?
The saddest thing about his passing is that now we will never know. Michael Jackson may have died Thursday, June 25, 2009, but the Michael Jackson I loved watching had already been gone for a very long time.
Permalink | Comments (23) | Post your comment | Categories: Tributes
The Oscars go to 10 Best Picture nominees
Wednesday, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences announced that starting next year there will be 10 nominees for Best Picture.
I can’t quite decide if this is good news or bad news. Maybe it’s both. But I can tell you this much: I’m quite sure this is a direct response to a certain movie not getting nominated last year. it was called The Dark Knight.
The theory lately goes that the Oscars have been losing ratings and relevance because they don’t nominate popular hits enough. People complain the nominated pictures are too stuffy, pretentious or otherwise inaccessible/unseen to Joe and Jane Average, so viewership of the show has been declining.
That argument was always bunk anyway. People have increasingly short memories and forget the fact that Ghost and Four Weddings and a Funeral were both Best Picture nomineees. Neither of those is exactly “arty,” but still, there sat Ghost alongside Goodfellas and there sat Four Weddings alongside Forrest Gump and Pulp Fiction.
And it’s more than a little disingenuous of the Academy to suggest this hearkens back to the 1930s and 40s when there were 10 nominees, and Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, Stagecoach, The Wizard of Oz and Gone with the Wind were all nominated in the same year. Give me a break. 2009 isn’t 1939, and this ain’t no golden age for movies.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying popular movies shouldn’t be nominated. The Dark Knight absolutely should have made the cut. So should have WALL-E. Had there been 10 nominees last year, the field might have looked like this:
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Frost/Nixon
Milk
The Reader
Slumdog Millionaire
The Dark Knight
Doubt
Gran Torino
WALL-E
The Wrestler
The good news is that deserving films that wouldn’t have made the cut will now. Pixar’s Up now has a real shot at the Best Picture prize, rather than having to settle for Best Animated Feature. Heck, even Star Trek has a chance now. The general consensus is that it is one of the most flat-out entertaining films of the year. It will deserve a nomination.
At the same time, it’s going to be a stretch sometimes to fill those 10 slots. And in so doing, I think Oscar will end up cheapening itself. Now that it’s that much easier to make the cut, maybe it’s not such an honor to be nominated after all.
What do you think of having 10 nominees? If this means movies like The Dark Knight get nominated, will you be more likely to watch the Oscars?
Permalink | Comments (10) | Post your comment | Categories: Oscars Sunday Night
Transformers ROTF: More is less
Memo to: Michael Bay, director and sensory overloader
From: Eric Robinette, frazzled film reviewer, AKA Sir Critic
CC: Blog readers
I have to admit, Mike, I owe you my congratulations. I didn’t think you would do it, but you sure proved me wrong.
With Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen, you have made your worst film since the atrocity known as Bad Boys II. Compared to this sequel, the first Transformers soars like the original The Day the Earth Stood Still.
Now, I can practically hear people’s eyes rolling. “Here comes the stuffy critic who can’t appreciate robots beating each other up.” Not so. Terminator 2: Judgment Day - I rest my case. But when a Transformers movie can’t even get the robot fighting right, it fails on the most basic level.
Speaking of leveling, I’ll be honest with you Mike. I went into your movie with a chip on my shoulder. I had a really bad day long before I saw the film. But that doesn’t mean I wasn’t willing to give your sequel a chance. I was hoping at the very least the movie would match the original: tolerable, but still mediocre. Heck, I thought it was vaguely possible you might surprise me and direct a movie I actually liked. You did it once with The Rock.
For the first hour or so, I thought the sequel might not be so bad. The action scenes often didn’t make sense, but that’s normal for you. At the very least, your editing wasn’t too frenzied, Shia LaBeouf was engaging, and a couple of ideas were actually kinda fun, particularly the one robot who could transform into something besides a machine. I’ll be nice and not spoil it for the other people reading this.
But then the movie kept going on …
And on …
And on …
And on ..
And on …
And on until finally 2.5 hours seemed like 2.5 years. I know you’re the master of excess, Mike, but I think you really should sell this movie to dental offices. By the time it was finally over, it made me totally numb.
Now, I’m not going to sit here like some other critics and complain that the plot makes no sense. That’s true, but that’s beside the point. Calling your plot incomprehensible is like calling the sun hot. Of course it is.
No, the real problem is you didn’t get the robots right. When the movie gave us the first transformation and I couldn’t tell what the heck was going on, I knew we were in trouble.
Have you had your eyes checked lately, Mike? I’m starting to wonder if you’re getting nearsighted. You shoot the action scenes with the cameras way too close. Not only is it hard to tell what’s happening, but the close angles obscure the best part of the movie: the sterling visual effects. For a summer blockbuster, that’s an unpardonable sin. It doesn’t help at all that most of the Decepticons look the same, so I couldn’t tell them apart.
Almost as bad are the jokes. You really should give up on comedy, Mike, you suck at it. You hit a new low with two of the Autobots, who are nothing less than a robot minstrel show, the android version of Amos and Andy. People thought Jar Jar Binks was offensive? He’s a teddy bear compared to these two.
Maybe fans will like this movie, maybe they won’t. Just for the record, Roger Ebert liked the first movie, but hated this one. And even some people in the geek crowd aren’t feeling you, Mike. People may think I went into this movie prepared to hate it, but it might be just as dangerous to go into this movie prepared to love it.
Believe it or not, Mike, I want to like your movies. Really, I do. But I’m beginning to think you just don’t have it in you. You know that chip on my shoulder? When it turned into an anvil at the end of ROTF, I could have won a Pulitzer and a date with Amy Adams, and your movie still would have ruined my day.
GRADE: D
Permalink | Comments (24) | Post your comment | Categories: Reviews
What’s opening/on DVD/What are you watching?
Welcome to the deluxe edition of What Are You Watching! Since one new movie comes out on a Wednesday this week, and because today is DVD day, you get three of my regular blog posts rolled into one!
On DVD
Confessions of a Shopaholic: This movie seemed to have everything going for it. It was adapted from the popular Sophie Kinsella books, had a good director in PJ Hogan (My Best Friend’s Wedding) and a very talented lead in Isla Fisher - and yet the movie fizzled at the box office. It would seem something got lost in translation.
Inkheart: This fantasy about a man who can make fictional characters come to life by merely reading their books got rather lost in the shuffle early this year, which is too bad, Adapted from the well-loved Cornelia Funke novel, the movie sometimes feels messy and cluttered. I sensed it was a real struggle to adapt the novel to the screen. Still, a strong cast, including Brendan Fraser, Jim Broadbent and Paul Bettany liven things up, as do some imaginative visuals. GRADE: B
The Pink Panther 2: I don’t like to wish misfortune on anyone, but I couldn’t help but smile when audiences said “No, thanks” to this unnecessary sequel to the ineffectual remake.
Waltz With Bashir: I was very sorry to miss this animated documentary about the 1982 Lebanon war in theaters, so I am very eager to see it on DVD.
What’s opening this week?
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen: I like to give Michael Bay grief on this blog, but I’m hoping this movie will be good. Really, I am. What I hope and what I expect, however, are two entirely different things. But I am wondering about something. Audiences have by and large rejected Terminator Salvation because it’s all mechanics and no heart. So why is the intent to see on Transformers so high, when it’s also all mechanics and no heart? Just asking.
My Sister’s Keeper: Add the director of The Notebook to an adaptation of a novel about a girl who seeks medical emancipation from her parents, and what do you get? Instant tearjerker. The initial buzz on this one is pretty quiet so far, but it’s hard to bet against a cast that includes Abigail Breslin, Alec Baldwin and Cameron Diaz. It opens Friday.
The Neon might open Sam Mendes’ Away We Go Friday; that movie with John Krasinski and Maya Rudolph has been called director Sam Mendes antidote to his wrenching Revolutionary Road. The Little Art hangs on to Up and adds Star Trek to the mix this week.
What Are You Watching?
I reintroduced this column last week, so check here to find out more of what it’s all about.
The Conversation: I almost forgot how haunting Francis Ford Coppola’s 1974 film, made in between the two Godfathers, was. Almost. The story of a surveillance man (Gene Hackman) who gets in way over his head remains chilling.
The Fortune Cookie: Puzzlingly, Billy Wilder told Cameron Crowe he didn’t care for this film much, saying “it was the beginning of my downfall.” I can’t agree with him. It’s not among Wilder’s very best movies, but the first screen teaming of Lemmon and Matthau (the latter won an Oscar) makes it more than a little funny. GRADE: A-
The Front Page: More Wilder and Lemmon/Matthau. I can better understand why this one isn’t that well regarded. Wilder was coasting here, and the whole endeavor seems kind of pointless, considering the 1931 movie The Front Page had already been successfully remade as His Girl Friday. Again, however, the comic team of Lemmon and Matthau makes it worthwhile. GRADE: B
So what are you watching/anticipating?
Permalink | Comments (3) | Post your comment |
My take on the IMAX/LIEMAX controversy
As most everyone knows, Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen comes out this week, and you might be thinking about seeing it in IMAX, especially since parts of the movie were shot using IMAX cameras, like The Dark Knight was.
Thing is, depending on where you go, you may not be seeing it in “real” IMAX.
Last month, controversy boiled over when actor Aziz Ansari, wrote this blog post with righteous indignation, feeling he was cheated when he went to see an IMAX screening of Star Trek, and found the screen wasn’t nearly as big as the IMAX screens he was used to seeing.
Indeed, there are two types of IMAX screens. The “classic” IMAX, as seen at the Wright Patterson Air Force Museum in Dayton, is one of these. The screen measures about 76 by 97 feet, and has an aspect ratio of 1.33 to 1, the same as a standard television.
The newer type of IMAX screen, which you’ll find in commercial movie theaters as opposed to museums, measures about 28 by 58 feet and has an aspect ratio of about 1.85 to 1 - roughly the shape of a high-definition TV. This picture explains the difference (click to enlarge).
The IMAX at Newport on the Levee is one of the smaller kinds. The IMAX at the National Amusements in Springdale is a version called MPX, which I believe is larger than some of the newer installations, but still not as big as classic IMAX. Check out this map for a nationwide directory. Some people refer to this as “LIEMAX” and feel it’s a rip-off.
Now, I am very much a stickler when it comes to presentation of movies. I refuse to watch a movie panned and scanned, and I sneer at “fullscreen” DVDs when I see them on shelves. I’m also not fond of squashing and stretching a picture to make it “fit” on an HDTV so that people on the edges of the frame look like they should be linebackers for the NFL. The people who made these films certainly woudn’t want us to watch their movies that way.
So I’m rather surprised to find myself taking a somewhat conservative stance on the IMAX/LIEMAX brouhaha. I’ve seen a number of movies in the new kind of IMAX, and I’ve never felt cheated. Sure, the screen is smaller than the classic IMAX, but it is also notably larger than a conventional movie screen. The sound has much more kick to it too. I saw The Polar Express in IMAX 3D at Springdale, and it remains one of the top 10 moviegoing experiences of my life.
The key question for me is this: Are we cutting off image? In most cases of the new IMAX, I don’t believe so. Most movies are shot in 1.85 to 1 or 2.35 to 1, the latter of which is called Scope. In the case of Scope movies like Star Trek, you’ll see thin black bars on the top and bottom of the picture, just like you do on an HDTV. I saw Star Trek at the Springdale IMAX, and it looked and sounded great.
However, if the movie is shot partly in IMAX, as Dark Knight and Transformers:ROTF were, then there is a distinct possibility that image will be lost. The scenes shot with IMAX cameras have a ratio of 1.33 to 1. On some, if not all of the the new IMAX screens, the tops and bottoms of the image in those scenes might be cropped. If you want to see the full effect of a movie shot in the actual IMAX format, you have to catch in it classic IMAX.
Does all this matter to you? What has your experience with the “new” IMAX been? Do you feel cheated?
Permalink | Comments (7) | Post your comment | Categories: Coming Attractions, Moviegoing
Bullock, Reynolds deserve better ‘Proposal’
To the proposal of Sandra Bullock and Ryan Reynolds as a couple, I give a heartfelt “I do.”
To the kind of middling movie they’re in, The Proposal, I give a half-hearted, “Well, I guess you’re sort of OK.”
The movie is one of those pleasant but innocuous, predictable comedies that’s a lot more enjoyable than it ought to be thanks to the sheer charisma of the two leads. Bullock and Reynolds double-handedly make The Proposal worth seeing, even if the movie is only passable.
Bullock and Reynolds star as Margaret and Andrew, a book editor and her forever put-upon guy Friday. She’s the sort of no-nonsense shrew that scares men and women away, while he always looks like he’s ready to break into a chorus of “We Gotta Get Out of This Place.”
However, when Margaret, a Canadian, is threatened with deportation and the prospect of losing her job, she blackmails Andrew into marrying her. In return, Andrew blackmails Margaret into promising him the promotion he has always wanted.
So far, so good. It’s a clever idea for a romantic comedy. Then our charming couple heads to Alaska to meet Andrew’s family, a well-to-do Kennedy-esque clan that struck me as the dumbest people on earth.
Bullock and Reynolds’ play-acting at being a real couple was so obviously fake, I kept wondering why no one except the sniggering immigration agent saw through the ruse. The screenplay by Pete Chiarelli tries to give the family some depth by creating a rift between Andrew and his dad, played by Craig T. Nelson. That was a good idea - so why not go a step further and have the dad be the one who sees that these two aren’t a real couple?
That never happens. Instead, Andrew’s family and friends turn out to be the kind of zany, fun-loving dim bulbs straight from the textbook of Romantic Comedies 101, right down to the male stripper who turns out to be the town storekeeper. Har-de-har-har.
Betty White is reduced to playing the daffy old grandma, but since she’s Betty White, she’s funny anyway. However, that does lead to a lame scene where she and Bullock dance in Native American costumes in the woods, which leads to Bullock singing Lil’ Jon’s “Get Low.” You know, the song about sweat dripping down a body part women don’t possess? Anatomically, anyway?
Sorry, Sandra. Chris Rock did that joke first, and he was funnier than you.
Sill, I have to give Bullock credit - she does a good job melting from the ice queen to her usual winning persona. Reynolds was who blindsided me, though. The actor has now starred in three romance-related movies (Definitely, Maybe; Adventureland and this one) and he was very good in all of them. I used to cringe at his name in the Van Wilder days, but now I actually look forward to seeing him. That’s quite a transformation.
The central question for any romantic comedy is, “Do I want this guy and this girl to end up together?” And for Bullock and Reynolds, the answer is definitely yes. For The Proposal as a whole, it’s more definitely maybe.
GRADE: B-
Permalink | Comments (0) | Post your comment | Categories: Reviews
What’s opening Friday, June 19?
Summer’s big fireworks return next week with the opening of Transformers:ROTF (god, I love that acronym). So for now, the slate serves up a couple of comedies this week.
The Proposal: Sandra Bullock stars as an ice queen book editor who blackmails her put-upon assistant (Ryan Reynolds) into marrying her so she won’t be deported to Canada. From Anne Fletcher, the director of the not-bad 27 Dresses. Early buzz on this is good; I will offer my take Friday.
Year One: Michael Cera and Jack Black star in a cavemen movie, that, thankfully, has nothing to do with Geico, so far as I know. The early ads for this underwhelmed me, and one can never rule out a movie if Harold Ramis (Groundhog Day) is directing. Although then again, he can turn out clunkers like Bedazzled too …
At the arthouses
Neon hangs on to The Brothers Bloom (which I review back here) and opens Easy Virtue, a comedy of manners (or lack of same) starring Kristin Scott-Thomas, Colin Firth and Jessica Biel. It hasn’t been that well reviewed, but Neon is certainly extolling its virtues (rim shot).
The Little Art plays the best film of the year, Pixar’s Up, and has a special screening of the underrated Serenity Saturday, preceded by a special sing-along of “Dr. Horrible’s Sing-Along Blog.”
Permalink | Comments (0) | Post your comment | Categories: In Area Theaters
Would you see a fifth Indiana Jones movie?
Shia LaBeouf has told the BBC that “Steven [Spielberg] just said that he cracked the story on it before I left and I think they’re gearing that up.”
Now, for the record, I don’t consider Mr. LaBeouf a fountain of accurate information. For now, this news falls into the “Believe it, When I See It” file. But let’s just say for the sake of argument it is true. After all, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull DID make $787 million worldwide.
Are you interested in a fifth movie?
Now, I know it’s a popular sport to kick Crystal Skull around. I can HEAR eyes rolling at Shia’s “news.” Still, I call foul on that game. Sure, the movie has some pretty significant flaws. The ending especially lacked excitement, for instance. But it’s my considered opinion (explained more thoroughly here) that people are entirely too hard on Indy IV. It’s not THAT much sillier than the prior Indiana Jones movies, which I think people tend to view through the rose-colored glasses of nostalgia.
You may argue I see Crystal Skull through rose-colored glasses myself, but that’s my story, and I’m sticking to it. That being the case, I’m cautiously optimistic about a fifth Indiana Jones movie. I resisted the prospect of a fourth one too, but eventually, my resistance crumpled like a smart-aleck swordsman felled by a single bullet.
What do you think? Would you see Indiana Jones and the Whatever of the Wherever?
Permalink | Comments (10) | Post your comment | Categories: Coming Attractions
The return of What Are You Watching?
Today is normally the day I would review the DVD releases, and there are two new titles that will rent very well: The Friday the 13th remake and Tyler Perry’s Madea goes to Jail. I have nothing to say about either one, and quite honestly, have no interest in either one, so I’ve done my duty by letting you know they’re out there. If you want em, have at em.
Moving on, I would like to resurrect a column in this blog space I tried to start some time back, called What Are You Watching? I’ll do my best to run this regularly on Tuesdays, and give it a chance to take off.
The concept is pretty simple. I will offer short reviews of movies I’ve seen on TV or DVD, and in theaters if I haven’t already given them a full review.
I invite you to do the same. Tell me what movies you’ve seen lately, whether they were old or new, or whether you saw them on the big or small screen. Even if it’s something you’ve seen a million times, that’s fair game too. Even if it’s a movie I’ve already covered, like The Hangover or Up, tell me what you thought of it. Anything goes.
So with that in mind, here’s what I’ve seen lately. With one exception, all are available on DVD.
The Brothers Bloom: Fans of this movie about con men and their elaborate schemes absolutely rave about it, while its detractors say its all style over substance. I fall somewhere in between.The writing and the visual style are so self-consciously showy that it comes off as too hip for the room. At the same time, some of the shots and story ideas are so imaginative, it’s hard to resist the energy. Who really saves the film is Rachel Weisz. She’s absolutely delightful as the mark Adrien Brody falls for, and she gives the film much-needed warmth. It’s playing at the Neon now. GRADE: B
The Children’s Hour: This William Wyler drama about Shirley MacLaine and Audrey Hepburn being accused of being lesbians absolutely wiped me out. An underrated must-see. You remember Brokeback Mountain? This movie covered that ground first, and just about as well. GRADE: A
Excalibur: John Boorman’s take on King Arthur and company is great fun; gloriously overheated. It’s certainly preferable to the dreadful film musical Camelot. GRADE: B+
The Electric Horseman: This Robert Redford/Jane Fonda romance ODs on the cheesy romance, but it’s endearing all the same. Fun to watch as a time capsule of Vegas in the 70s. GRADE: B
Nothing but the Truth: This fictionalization of the Valerie Plame story sometimes stacks the deck too high, as is writer-director Rod Lurie’s wont, but it’s still very powerful. Kate Beckinsale gives a career-best performance. GRADE: A-
Pygmalion: This 1938 version of the George Bernard Shaw play is supposed to be a classic, but I don’t rate it quite that high, mainly because I find Leslie Howard a bit of a wet blanket as a lead. It’s still better than My Fair Lady, though. GRADE: B
Robin and Marian: The movie shows us what might have happened with Robin Hood and Maid Marian after Robin Hood came back from the Crusades. It’s a bit slight story-wise, but with Sean Connery and Audrey Hepburn as the leads, it’s more than a little charming. GRADE: B+
Sherrybaby: Fairly standard drug addiction recovery drama gets a boost from a sterling performance by Maggie Gyllenhaal. GRADE: B+
They Were Expendable: John Ford’s take of PT boat crewmen in World War II ODs on sentiment, but gradually gains power as it moves along. And was there a cuter nurse than Donna Reed? No there, wasn’t. GRADE: A-
Throne of Blood: Kurosawa+Macbeth = Wow. GRADE: A+
Tsotsi: This drama about a criminal who softens when he accidentally kidnaps a baby won the Best Foreign Language Film Oscar a few years back. It certainly has its powerful moments, but I also found it dramatically obvious and overrated. GRADE: B
Unfaithfully Yours: Absolutely hilarious, acidic black comedy about a musical conductor (Rex Harrison) who imagines various dire fates for his wife (Linda Darnell) when she suspects he’s cheating on him. One of Preston Sturges’ best. GRADE: A
Your turn. Respond to any of my reviews or tell us what you’ve been watching. Give us recommendations for our Netflix queues/DVRs!
Permalink | Comments (3) | Post your comment | Categories: Ask the Audience, Reviews
Help! Save Eddie Murphy’s career!
Eddie Murphy’s new movie may be called Imagine That, but its box office this weekend should give Murphy a hard slap of reality.
The movie grossed $5.7 million dollars. For the entire weekend. Let’s put that into perspective, shall we?
That’s only slightly better than last summer’s Meet Dave, which made $5.2 million its opening weekend.
That’s about as much as the current box office leaders, Up and The Hangover, were making in one day. During the week.
That’s only about as much as much as 12 Rounds made during its opening weekend. Congratulations, Eddie. You are now the box office equal of John fricken’ Cena!
Clearly, Murphy’s career is on the skids. And clearly, not many people above the age of 6 are interested in his movies anymore. How can he get back on track? I have a few ideas.
1) No more family “comedies”: When Murphy started making these several years ago, it was kind of novel. Now it’s old hat. I didn’t think these movies were very good even when they were moneymakers like Daddy Day Care and Dr. Dollittle. Now too many bland Haunted Mansions have caught up with him so no one cares anymore. And apparently Murphy hasn’t learned his lesson. On his slate is a remake of The Incredible Shrinking Man, by the writers of the Night at the Museum movies. Eddie. Stop. Enough. (The Shrek sequels get a pass, those are understandable, even if they’re diminishing in quality.)
2) Go back to making grown-up comedies: They don’t necessarily have to be raunchy movies, but good, solid adult comedies that will allow him to flex those comedy muscles that have atrophied. Something like Bowfinger would be nice.
3) Take more supporting roles, or at least co-leads: It worked like gangbusters for Dreamgirls, his one recent unqualified success. And actually, Bowfinger is a good example there too. He was a lead in that, but that was just as much Steve Martin’s movie as it was his. Those days when he could take a lame script like The Golden Child and turn it into a hit just because he was in it? Done and gone.
4) Work with A-list talent behind the camera: Too many of Murphy’s movies lately have been directed by nondescript names like Brian Robbins (Norbit, Meet Dave) and Tom Dey (Showtime). He needs to turn to good directors like Frank Oz. It would be really interesting to see him in one of Judd Apatow’s movies. Heck, even John Landis would be preferable at this point. But again, Murphy doesn’t seem to know what’s good for him. Robbins is directing him again in a movie called A Thousand Words. (sigh).
5) Check the ego at the door. Or better yet, sell it: Some people were surprised when Murphy lost his Dreamgirls Oscar to Alan Arkin in Little Miss Sunshine. I wasn’t. I called that a mile away. He has alienated too many people in Hollywood with his self-important, “I’m god’s gift to this movie” attitude. And quite frankly, he alienated me. When he picked up some awards for Dreamgirls, he kept going on about how he worked in the movie for “free.” Yuk, yuk, yuk.
You may have been laughing Eddie, but all that told me was that all you care about is money. Well now your movies aren’t making any.
Don’t get me wrong. I don’t dislike Eddie Murphy. I’m very disappointed in him. It’s not that he’s lost his talent. If that were the case, it would be easier to write him off and move on. But as Dreamgirls showed, he can still deliver the goods. The problem is, that movie aside, Murphy just isn’t trying anymore. He’s capable of so much better, but he takes the lazy road almost every time now. And for someone as talented as him, that’s a crying shame.
What do you think? Why did you stop seeing Eddie Murphy’s movies? What would get you to go back to him again?
Permalink | Comments (15) | Post your comment | Categories: Celebrities
Travolta, Washington propel ‘Pelham 1 2 3’
The more The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3 talked, the better I liked it.
That may seem like a strange thing to say about an action movie, but Tony Scott’s remake of the 1974 subway hijack thriller is one of the few action movies in which the action isn’t so much the point as it is beside the point. In this film, the dialogue is much more enjoyable than any of the chases or shootouts.
Granted, the 1974 film, starring Walter Matthau and Robert Shaw, was more a psychological thriller than a chase movie, and the remake honors that perhaps a little too well. The battle of wills between Denzel Washington and John Travolta is so effective, that when the remake tries to shoehorn in a chase or a fight, it’s usually distracting.
Washington plays Walter Garber, a lifelong subway employee who just happens to be working dispatch when a mastermind who calls himself Ryder (Travolta) hijacks a train and demands $10,000,000, or he’ll start killing one passenger per minute past his deadline.
It’s a great, suspenseful setup, and Scott would seem a natural fit for this story, having handled a similar battle of wills very skillfully in Crimson Tide, his submarine thriller with Washington and Gene Hackman. However, Scott has a reputation for handling action much better than he does drama.
That’s why it’s so surprising that in his Pelham, what happens is the exact opposite. The drama is compelling, but the action scenes are flat and ordinary, and even, I would argue, unnecessary.
Every time the movie cut away from Travolta and Washington to show a shootout or a car crash, my interest level dropped. It didn’t help that Scott too often staged the scenes using slow motion and blur-o-vision that only diminished the drama. Even the action scenes in the preposterous Deja Vu were more imaginatively shot. Here, I didn’t care about the pursuits and guns, I was interested in the verbal sparring between the leads, sharply written by Brian Helgeland.
Washington is less physically active here than in his other movies with Scott, but he’s no less commanding than usual, playing a deeply flawed man who has hero status unwillingly thrust about him. Although he’s a touch hammy at times, Travolta meshes with Washington very well, revealing Ryder to be more than a little unhinged, but also more than a little intelligent and diabolical. John Turturro lends strong support as a hostage negotiator in over his head.
That Scott felt the need to amp up the action is more than understandable in this age of short attention spans when too many people care more about popcorn than plot. Still, The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3 stays on track most of the way. If the whole movie were as good as Washington and Travolta, it might have been outstanding. As is, Pelham has to settle for solid but unexceptional.
GRADE: B
Permalink | Comments (0) | Post your comment | Categories: Reviews
Watch the trailer for ‘Shutter Island,’ Scorsese’s latest
I saw The Taking of Pelham 123 Wednesday night and will tell you more about that Friday, but I saw something that I liked even better than Pelham.
That would be the trailer for Martin Scorsese’s new film, Shutter Island, which comes out October 2.
In the film, U.S. Marshal Teddy Daniels (Leonardo DiCaprio) is investigating the disappearance of a murderess who escaped from a hospital for the insane and may be hiding on the titular island. Mark Ruffalo, Michelle Williams, Ben Kinglsey, Max von Sydow and Jackie Earle Haley co-star.
At first glance, this looks like very pulpy material. The two Scorsese movies it most reminded me of were Cape Fear (suspense thriller) and the underrated Bringing Out the Dead, via the supernatural elements. I have to play Pavlov and admit my reaction was instinctively to salivate. Scorsese is my favorite director, so by default, this is the movie of 2009 I’m most looking forward to seeing.
All I will say as far as awards prospects go is this may not look like an Oscar film - but they said the same thing about The Departed, and look what happened there. The movie is also based on a novel by Dennis Lehane, which worked out well for Clint Eastwood (Mystic River) and Ben Affleck (Gone Baby Gone).
I’m excited. How about you?:
Permalink | Comments (4) | Post your comment | Categories: Coming Attractions
What’s opening Friday, June 12
Denzel Washington, John Travolta and Eddie Murphy bring their movies to the multiplex this weekend, with sometimes better results than expected.
Imagine That: When I saw the trailers for Eddie Murphy’s latest comedy, I cringed. I lamented that by and large, he just doesn’t seem to be trying anymore. And yet some reviews on this one (click the title) have said it’s actually not half-bad. Perhaps I was too hasty to judge, but I still would rather see Murphy stretch than resort to another paint-by-numbers comedy. By my count, the last hilarious live action comedy he made was Bowfinger, and that was 10 years ago.
The Taking of Pelham 123: The 1974 subway film with Walter Matthau and Robert Shaw has been given a slick sheen and a shot of adrenaline by director Tony Scott, who has Washington and Travolta as his leads. Review posts Friday.
At the arthouses
The Neon Movies opens The Brothers Bloom, a comedy with Adrien Brody, Rachel Weisz and Mark Ruffalo. It’s quite well liked by some, even though the overall reception is rather mild.
Also new at Neon is the documentary Tyson, as in former heavyweight champion Mike. Nice bit of timing, considering his appearance in The Hangover, a highlight of that movie.
The Little Art opens Two Lovers, which for better or worse, is probably best known as being Joaquin Phoenix’s “last film” - although it was well-liked too. Also opening there is Anvil! The Story of Anvil, the well- reviewed documentary that recalls Spinal Tap.
Permalink | Comments (0) | Post your comment | Categories: In Area Theaters
What are your favorite/least favorite summer movies?
The folks over at Ain’t It Cool and the Web site Hit Fix came up with a good question, so I’m going to appropriate/co-opt/steal it. And this one’s pretty easy:
What are your favorite summer movies/summer movie experiences?
If I had to name my absolute favorite (and I guess I have to in a post like this, don’t I?), I’d have to say Raiders of the Lost Ark. Two things in particular stand out about seeing that movie for the first time. First, there was the way it made time seem to fly. I remember checking my watch at the end of that movie and being surprised 2 hours had passed. It felt more like 20 minutes.
The other thing I remember most? The ROAR that went up when Indy shot the villain waving his knife around. God, I miss movie theaters that could hold 1,000 people or more.
Some other favorite movies/memories:
Seeing Terminator 2 and being asked what I thought of the movie, which wore me out so much I could only give a rating by holding up five fingers.
Seeing Hercules (the 1997 Disney movie, mind you) and discovering the wonders of Susan Egan as Megara.
Seeing Star Wars: Episode II at a screening with a room full of critics and being taken aback when I didn’t hear a HOORAY at the opening fanfare.
Miracle on 34th Street: OK, I didn’t exactly see this on its original release, but it DID come out May 2, 1947. By today’s calendar, that counts as a summer movie.
As for my least favorite summer movie, that’s also beyond easy: Bad Boys II. I know I pick on it all the time here, but Michael Bay will be doing penance for that for the rest of his life in my mind. And so it goes …
So what are your favorite/least favorite summer movies?
Permalink | Comments (10) | Post your comment | Categories: Ask the Audience
Harry Potter release date changed - again!
OK, how many people just had heart attacks?
You can relax a little, Potterphiles. Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince still comes out on July 15, as scheduled - in regular theaters. However, you’ll have to wait a little longer to see the IMAX/partly 3D version. That won’t be released now until July 29.
Why? Blame the giant robots. Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen comes out June 24. Because the Paramount’s deal with IMAX obligates theaters to show Transformers for a month, that means Potter can’t hit the really big screen until late July.
One wonders why someone didn’t see this coming with so many IMAX releases crowding the marketplace now. Seems the company can’t catch a break. First there was that whole IMAX/LIE-MAX controversy about whether the newer IMAX screens were “real” IMAX. (I’ll opine more on that later.) Now this.
As it happens, both films will have IMAX-only benefits, Just as Christopher Nolan did with The Dark Knight, Michael Bay shot portions of the movie with IMAX cameras, so those scenes will have extra audio/visual oomph. Unlike The Dark Knight, however, the Transformers sequel will run slightly longer in the IMAX version, with scenes exclusive to those screens.
As was the case with Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, Half Blood Prince will feature the clmamtic scenes in 3D - but only in the IMAX version.
Look at it this way, Potter fans - it’s just one more reason to hate Michael Bay. But what do you all think? Are you OK with this or are you bugged again since you had one delay already?
Permalink | Comments (5) | Post your comment | Categories: Coming Attractions
DVDs - Gran Torino, The International, and more
This week’s DVDs include a pair of movie with old school-ish assets.
Gran Torino: What a long, strange trip this movie took, from a trailer that had some people (myself included) scratching their heads to a theatrical run that made it one of Clint Eastwood’s biggest hits. It’s far from his best movie, and I’d stop just shy of calling it a great movie, but it is one of his most fascinating. His portrayal of an embittered bigot who unexpectedly takes Asian neighbors under his wing both celebrates and critiques his “give em hell” persona. The movie goes for the cheap and easy laugh a bit too often, and the storytelling becomes a bit ham-handed at times, but at its best, it’s quite affecting. Full review. GRADE: B+
The International: This thriller plays a bit like one of the paranoid conspiracy movies of the 1970s and has great international flavor — that’s no surprise coming from Run Lola Run; director Tom Tykwer. Still, despite solid performances from leads Clive Owen and Naomi Watts, the story about sinister bankers feels dry and lacks emotion. Some solid action set pieces, especially a shootout in a museum, make it worthwhile regardless. GRADE: B
Also out today
Fired Up: The poster for this movie highlighted the abbreviation FU. I don’t think that also stands for Felix Ungar.
Permalink | Comments (0) | Post your comment | Categories: On Video/DVD
‘The Hangover,’ ‘Night at the Museum’ sequel and more
Betcha won’t find anyone else who groups those two movies together, will you?
No, this isn’t one of those nutty double features I blogged about a while back, but I did see those movies, and two others this weekend, so here are my short-ish takes on all of them.
The Hangover
When I first heard about this movie, I wasn’t that excited. I’m so far removed from the frat boy type it’s not funny, so “let’s get drunk and have a wild time” movies usually bore me to death.
As Roger Ebert wisely says, though, it’s not what a movie is about, it’s how it’s about it. The Hangover really isn’t about a drunken binge - it’s about the aftermath of said drunken binge when some best buds go for a bachelor party in Vegas, only to wake up the next morning to find their hotel room is trashed, a tiger is lurking in their bathroom, and worst of all, the groom-to-be is nowhere to be found.
That’s a great setup - and the payoffs are even better. One of the best things about The Hangover is I could never tell where it was going. I’m usually pretty good at predicting gags (it’s not all that hard) but this movie consistently surprised me and kept me laughing. Director Todd Phillips cleverly constructs the movie so that it’s not just a series of jokes. Instead, the momentum builds as one gag points the way to another gag. The movie has a freewheeling sense of intensifying doom that reminded me of Martin Scorsese’s After Hours.
The cast is also first-rate. Everyone is solid, but my favorites were Ed Helms as the nervous, relatively straight-arrow member of the pack, who has a great moment improvising a song about their predicament, and Zach Galifianakis as the weirdest, most endearing outcast you’re ever likely to meet. Believe the hype on this one - this is the kind of buzz I thoroughly enjoy.
GRADE: A-
Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian
I know what some of you regular readers are thinking: “Oh, he only saw this because Amy Adams is in it.” Not quite true, actually. I saw it because it was the second feature at the drive-in after Up, which I watched for the third time. (Still a masterpiece, by the way, even amid the cacophony of a drive-in).
But yes, just as I predicted, the esteemed Ms. Adams is pretty much the only worthwhile part of this noisy, predictable sequel. She’s a joy to watch as she ebulliently plays Amelia Earhart; her scenes have a sprightly energy the movie is otherwise sorely lacking.
I never understood why the original Night at the Museum was such a big hit. To me it was one obvious joke and special effects scene after another, with a tired old plot about a guy who’s too busy to notice how cute his kid is. Zzzz.
The sequel is more of the same. Save for Adams and a clever scene in which she and Ben Stiller interact with famous paintings and photographs, the movie displays not one shred of the kind of invention it wants to promote. When a movie can’t even wring laughs from Star Wars and Sesame Street characters, what we have here is a failure of imagination. My advice: Take the kids to Up instead, or save some money and visit a real museum.
GRADE: C
I also saw two films playing at the Neon this week. More about those after the the jump.
12: My favorite court drama of all time is 12 Angry Men, so I was curious to see how this Russian version, an Oscar nominee for Best Foreign Language Film, would compare. The answer is, very well. This film follows the outline of the original pretty closely (12 jurors debate the fate of a young man accused of killing his father), but makes the dynamics between the 12 a bit different and takes some detours into the life of the defendant. Those detours distract from the jurors and make the film run a bit longer than it should, but it’s fascinating to see the story play out in a Russian milieu. GRADE: B+
Paris 36: What seemed at first to be a French version of Moulin Rouge! never delivers on its promise. At first, it looks to be a high-energy musical inspired by the Busby Berekley extravaganzas of the 1930s. Then, unfortunately, a dull and convoluted plot about romantic and business entanglements drains the life from the film. The players are lively and some of the musical numbers are fun to watch, but there is not enough of either to make the movie worthwhile. GRADE: C
Permalink | Comments (0) | Post your comment | Categories: Reviews
Sir Critic’s Summer Movie Capsules, 1.0
Fortunately, I was not able to see My Life in Ruins or Land of the Lost this week. Unfortunately, I was also unable to screen this week’s one decent prospect, The Hangover, which leaves me with nothing new to review.
Fortunately, I can still play movie guide by offering you capsules of movies playing at a theater near you. Hyperlinks go to full reviews.
Angels & Demons: While it’s a vast improvement over the turgid, pompous Da Vinci Code, that’s like saying a paper cut is better than a severed limb. The sequel works fairly OK as an action film, with several exciting scenes, and the movie actually moves this time — but I still didn’t care about anybody or anything. The “gotcha” plot twist is preposterous. GRADE: C+
Drag Me to Hell: Director Sam Raimi, who had burned himself out with the underwhelming Spider-Man 3, returns to form with this very entertaining, gleefully gross and deliriously goofy horror/comedy romp about a woman trying to rid herself of a death curse. Alison Lohman, an underrated actress, is ideal in the lead. It doesn’t mean much of anything — but that’s all for the better. GRADE: B+
Ghosts of Girlfriends Past: This riff on “A Christmas Carol” has a potentially fun premise (Don Juan haunted by the spirits of his exes), but the movie fails to make it work, going for the obvious almost every time. Jennifer Garner is the movie’s sole saving grace. GRADE: C
Star Trek: Director J.J. Abrams resurrects the franchise in grand style by appealing to both longtime fans and to nonfans. The story remains true to the original characters, even while making imaginative changes, and Abrams gives the action scenes an energy rarely seen in the other movies. Terrific entertainment. GRADE: A
Terminator Salvation: As a spectacle, the fourth installment of the franchise isn’t half bad, with solid effects and decent action scenes, but emotionally it rings hollow. For all the razzle-dazzle, there’s no real reason to care. Only Sam Worthington, as a half-good, half-bad guy, makes a decent impression. GRADE: C+
Up: Pixar’s 10th feature is one of its best, featuring one of its most freewheeling and touching stories. At its core it’s about an elderly man who flies to South America by tying balloons to his house, but the movie offers so much more, from adventure to heartbreak and even a little science fiction. It’s a wild mix, but it never once steps wrong. A must-see, no matter how old or young you are. GRADE: A+
X-Men Origins: Wolverine: This comic book prequel isn’t as bad as I feared, but not nearly as good as it could have been. The movie is watchable enough, with some fun scenes, and Hugh Jackman is as charismatic as ever, but the story is so obvious and the effects so uneven, the film can’t measure up to its predecessors. GRADE: C+
Permalink | Comments (1) | Post your comment | Categories: Reviews
David Carradine, 1936-2009
David Carradine has been found dead in Bangkok. Initial reports indicated suicide, but the latest evidence suggests the death may have been accidental.
I’ll refrain from speculating on what has happened, but I will say I am very surprised and saddened to see that he is gone. Of course, he was best known for Kung Fu, but as is his wont, Quentin Tarantino gave him a late career resuscitation, casting him in the title role of Kill Bill. He created such a foreboding presence that even his voice alone could be chilling.
It’s a shame we won’t get to see - or hear - more of him.
Permalink | Comments (1) | Post your comment | Categories: Tributes
What’s opening Friday, June 5?
Ironically, as we get closer to the actual summer, the first week of June cools off a bit. With May’s big guns out of the way, somewhat smaller fare rules this week.
The Hangover: Director Todd Phillips has an uneven track record (Old School, School for Scoundrels) but this comedy about a nightmarish pre-wedding day bender in Vegas has generated some very strong buzz, pun actually not intended, but I’ll keep it.
Land of the Lost: I’m having my wisdom teeth pulled later this year. I’m looking forward to that more than this Will Ferrell monstrosity. The site CinemaBlend.com predicts it will be the bomb of the summer, and reviews are none too kind. At the time of this writing, it stands at 25% on Rotten Tomatoes and has a lowly 32 score on Metacritic. On the other hand, Roger Ebert has mounted a kind of touching defense of it.
My Life in Ruins: At first glance, it seemed like a good comeback vehicle for Nia Vardalos of My Big Fat Greek Wedding Fame, with her actually going to Greece this time. Problem: Vardalos didn’t write it. There is actually a character named Poupi Kakas. Oof.
At the arthouses
Neon is slated to open Paris 36, a tribute to the City of Lights of 1930s vintage from the director of The Chorus, and 12, an Oscar nominee for Best Foreign Language Film.
The Little Art plays Sugar, the acclaimed film from the directors of Half Nelson, will play the animated film Azur & Azmar Saturday
Permalink | Comments (5) | Post your comment | Categories: In Area Theaters
A ____ movie? You’ve GOT to be kidding!
I just ran across proof positive Hollywood will make a movie out of just about anything, so long as its based on a comic book, TV show, game or toy with even a wee bit of nostalgia attached.
Universal is considering a movie based on … Stretch Armstrong!
Stretch Armstrong?
Stretch Armstrong???
STRETCH ARMSTRONG????!!!?!?!?!
Oh come ON! Guys, if you’re gonna go for old toys, Shogun Warriors would make a lot more sense.
The only way I’ll buy that premise is if it’s done Toy Story-style, where Stretch is a toy, but he doesn’t know it. So it really causes him a world of pain when his kid owner punctures him and some purplish-red goop comes out. Because this is how some toys, “bleed,” you see.
Ah, heck with it, even that idea is dumb. And I thought the Drop Dead Fred remake was a bad idea …
Permalink | Comments (4) | Post your comment | Categories: Coming Attractions
The ‘Princess and the Frog’ flap continues …
A few weeks ago on this blog, I wrote about the “controversy” swirling around The Princess and the Frog, the new hand-drawn animated film from Disney coming in December. A number of you commented back “This is supposed to be offensive? How?”
Well, this is how it’s supposed to be offensive, according to The New York Times.
Having read the story, I still think the complaints are completely bogus. And I also quite agree with David Poland of Movie City News when he took the Times to task for running the story at all. Poland wrote: “On top of being late to the issue and manipulative in offering a news angle, the story is just not very good. (Reporter) Brooks opines, ‘The company wants to vanquish once and for all the whispers of racism that linger from stumbles in the past.’ I say ‘opines,’ because there is no quote connected in any way to Disney, even on background, to suggest that this is the case. Obviously, no one and no company want to have racism attached to their hip. But the inference is, throughout the piece, that this film itself is a reaction to Disney’s interest in how it is perceived. Please tell this to (directors) Musker, Clements, and (animation chief John) Lasseter, because I don’t believe it at all.”
Me neither folks. Disney has to know what lies ahead here. They’ve been going through these accusations for years, from The Song of the South to Aladdin, when Arabs griped about the lyric “Where they cut off your ear if they don’t like your face.” Call me a Pollyanna, but I find it very hard to believe Disney would willingly walk into that minefield again. In fact, if I were Disney I would use the occasion to release Song of the South on DVD, put it in its proper perspective and get that albatross off the company’s neck once and for all.
I’m disappointed in the Times for giving that much credence to these complainers. From where I sit, most if not all of these naysayers are only out to draw attention to themselves. And, I find such self-righteousness at least as offensive as the prejudice it supposedly decries.
Here’s a quaint notion: How about seeing the finished product before we complain? Oh, wait, that would be intelligent and fair. Never mind.
Permalink | Comments (5) | Post your comment | Categories: Coming Attractions, Sir Critic muses
DVDs: Leo/Kate, Defiance, Not That Into You
Today’s DVD offerings make for a varied mix of movies from earlier this year, all worthwhile to one degree or another.
Defiance: Director Ed Zwick’s drama about a group of Jews who become surprisingly effective resistance fighters gets off on the wrong foot, focusing too much on the melodramatic relationship between two rival brothers (Daniel Craig and Liev Schreiber). However, once the movie shifts its focus on how the Jews survive living in a forest, it becomes much more effective and compelling. Full review. GRADE: B+
He’s Just Not That Into You: This romantic comedy has an awful lot of players (pun intended) and that’s both its blessing and its curse. On the one hand, the movie benefits from a terrific cast, including Ben Affleck, Jennifer Aniston, Jennifer Connelly, Scarlett Johnasson, Drew Barrymore, Justin Long, Ginnifer Goodwin and Bradley Cooper. On the other hand, since there are multiple characters and plotlines, some are much more interesting than others. The movie veers all over the map and isn’t as clever as it thinks it is, but there are just enough appealing actors/stories to make it worth seeing. GRADE: B-
Revolutionary Road: Once touted as the film to beat at the Oscars, the movie’s luster faded when people saw it and decided its story of a strained marriage in the 50s cut too close to home. It is hard to watch at times, and I certainly wouldn’t recommend it to anyone in a rocky relationship. However, its excellently performed by Leonardo DiCaprio, Kate Winslet and Michael Shannon, well written by Justin Haythe and smartly directed by Sam Mendes. I believe history will show that it was the reception to this movie that was too cold, not the movie itself. And I believe history has already shown that Winslet got the Oscar for the wrong movie. Full review. GRADE: A
Permalink | Comments (0) | Post your comment | Categories: On Video/DVD
Drag yourselves to ‘Hell’
Just because this blog has been all Up in Pixar lately doesn’t mean that’s the only good new movie out there.
Almost as entertaining as Up is Drag Me to Hell, director Sam Raimi’s wild return to the kind of horror/comedy flicks he cut his teeth on, like Evil Dead and its follow-ups. Just when it looked like PG-13 horror has run its course, Raimi comes back and shows all the pretenders how it’s done.
Granted, this isn’t a relatively bloodless shocker like The Ring. From the moment the 70’s-era Universal logo comes on screen, it’s clear this is Raimi’s tribute to schlock cinema, and I would argue that it’s much better than what Robert Rodriguez and Quentin Tarantino came up with in Grindhouse.
It’s not so much a straight horror movie as it is a thriller with a plethora of nudges and winks, but that makes it all the more enjoyable. After all, how many non-animated movies do you see where a goat gets dialogue? Regular readers of this blog will notice I’m not much of a horror fan, but I am when it’s executed with this kind of verve and imagination. (And as far as representations of Hell go, the movie is also much more convincing than Angels & Demons.)
It helps that Raimi cast someone I wanted to root for. Alison Lohman is nothing if not a trooper in her role of a loan officer who refuses an extension to a scary-looking hag, only to find the hag has, um … connections to the underworld. Lohman had a good streak going for awhile with fine work in Matchstick Men, White Oleander and Big Fish before a series of poor choices tossed her back under the radar. I hope she can sustain the momentum this movie ought to give her.
The movie is nice career resuscitation for Raimi too. The Spider-Man movies have done very well for him, but he was clearly burnt out when he made the very uneven third movie. Drag Me to Hell allows him to kick back and cut loose, and he does so with style. (And just about the loudest soundtrack I’ve ever heard - parts of the movie are loud enough to make even Michael Bay wince.)
I was a little distressed to learn the movie opened a little less well than other horror offerings this year, like The Haunting in Connecticut and The Unborn - two movies I’ll wager most people will forget by October. Granted, Drag Me to Hell isn’t the kind of movie that lingers long in the memory either, but like a good thrill ride, it’s a lot of fun while it lasts.
GRADE: B+
Permalink | Comments (0) | Post your comment | Categories: Reviews
So how was Up?
I promise I’ll start posting about something other than Pixar real soon here, but for now, just a few more items:
1) Did you see the movie? What did you think of it? Here’s what I thought.
2) Where does it rank in the Pixar canon? I still have it hovering around #3, behind only WALL-E and Toy Story 2.
3) As is Pixar’s wont, they’ve hidden any number of “easter eggs” in the film. Here’s a roundup at /Film.
Permalink | Comments (1) | Post your comment | Categories: Ask the Audience, In Area Theaters
